I regularly use both Windows and Mac PCs, so any comments that I've never used a Mac are bunk. I've been using Windows 7 since before its public beta release at the first of this year. I use my Mac for video editing, iPhone development, etc. I love all of my computers equally -- my Windows PC, my Mac and my Linux servers. They all do what I ask them to do very well, and I have things about each that I like and things I don't.

But frankly, the differences in the Windows 7 and Mac OS X platforms from a usability standpoint are pretty much nil. Windows 7 has simplified much of the complexity introduced in Vista and made Windows a very clean and easy-to-use OS. I would even go so far as to predict that the days of Apple trampling all over Windows in the "I'm a Mac" commercials are pretty much over. Not to say Apple won't go after Windows 7 as soon as Windows 7 has some vulnerability or issue Apple can exploit in a TV commercial. I'll grant, too, that Apple still has its "cool" factor and Windows isn't like to encroach on that. But Windows 7 is not only a "good enough" operating system, it is so much better an OS and user experience that Apple will have to think hard before using the same advertising tactics that worked so well on Vista.

He notes a few key points, namely the clean and simple user experience in Windows 7, frequency of Mac crashes, the flexibility and lower cost of PCs overall, PC performance and considerations on computer security.

Coming out with such views, he's likely set himself up for a few swipes.

I'll add the rich ecosystem of devices from which to choose – whether you're looking for a new home desktop PC, a small notebook or a versatile kitchen model or high-end gaming rig with powerful graphics – you can choose the PC that best fits your need. I found that it's beneficial to consider what Mitchell looks at as a whole. As note here, I use Macs and PCs at home, and Windows 7 is my most often used OS at home and (obviously 😉 at work.

"Now Microsoft is fighting back with its own advertising campaign. I've enjoyed some of its elements. The Seinfeld spots were weird. I was intrigued by some of the "I'm a PC" spots that aired last fall, depicting PC users engaged in a variety of jobs—teaching law, protecting endangered species, blogging for Barack Obama. The message: You can use a Windows PC and still do cool and interesting things. Not bad. Then came the adorable little girls: Kylie, age 4, and Alexa, age 7, e-mailing pictures of fish and stitching together pictures of a fort into one. Microsoft, it seemed, had finally found its advertising voice.

"Yes, $699 beats the $2,800 you'd pay for a Mac with a 17-in. screen. But when it comes to PCs, there's still a great deal more to buy.

"Add it all up and it's not hard to imagine Lauren's $699 computer costing something closer to $1,500."

I'm sure that you'll see plenty of analysis on his analysis and opinions in the nearly 60 pages of comments, as John Byrne Editor-in-Chief of BusinessWeek.com, noted in his Tweet: "A raging Mac vs. PC debate at BW.com today. Perspectives from readers take up 56 pages on our site for a 2-page story. http://is.gd/sJTP"

"Can we all agree that it’s always a bad idea to mistake advertising for rational discourse? Axe deodorant won’t cause armies of gorgeous women to throw themselves at your feet. I know of no evidence that cows who live in California are any happier than those in other states, nor that their mood impacts the quality of their milk. Cigarette companies would still be claiming that their products were good for your throat if they could get away with it. After thirty years, I’m still unclear about the benefits of being a Pepper. That’s all fine. (Okay, not the part about the cigarette ads.)